Faithless
07-23-2006, 09:32 PM
Anyone seen those Washington Mutual TV ads showing this black narrator for Wamu talking about the other banks, and the other banks are presented by these old white dudes?
Apparently, those ads are not like by some. :rolleyes:
This would then have to qualify as a stereotype — a conventional, formulaic and oversimplified conception, opinion or image. The defense for this is that the ad is humorous. However, if every other use of a stereotype — even a gentle or humorous one — is labeled racist, chauvinistic or homophobic, shouldn't that same protection and consideration extend to white males?
http://www.trappedbanker.com/wamu.htm
Anti-white-male ad doesn't amuse (http://www.venturacountystar.com/vcs/opinion/article/0,1375,VCS_125_4831972,00.html)
By Scott Harris, scott@goldenagain.com | July 9, 2006
Washington Mutual is a $350 billion bank, based in Seattle, that does extensive business in California and is currently running a series of anti-white-male ads. The ads are known as the Banker's Pen. They show a group of middle-aged white males locked in a pen. All of them are wearing suits and ties, many are smoking cigars and most are balding and pudgy.
The counter to this is the casually dressed, hip, young black male who identifies the penned-up group as "traditional old-fashioned bankers" and goes on to say, "If they think it's wrong, we know it's right."
I don't think the depiction of "traditional old-fashioned bankers" as middle-aged white males is a coincidence, and I doubt there is a shortage of black, Latino or Asian actors, male and female, willing to play bankers in a television ad. I also doubt that in real life — even at WaMu — there is a shortage of blacks, Latinos, or Asians, male and female, who actually are bankers.
This would then have to qualify as a stereotype — a conventional, formulaic and oversimplified conception, opinion or image. The defense for this is that the ad is humorous. However, if every other use of a stereotype — even a gentle or humorous one — is labeled racist, chauvinistic or homophobic, shouldn't that same protection and consideration extend to white males?
Imagine other stereotypes and the reaction if they were used in an ad, no matter how accurate or inaccurate the stereotype, or how funny the ad. Picture an ad campaign with a penned-up group of executives breaking down and crying in stressful situations — and they were all women. The only one who could stand up to the stress — a white male?
How about an ad talking about the value of education and using a penned-up group of young black males, dressed in gang gear, as the counter to the studious Asian? What would the reaction be if the ad was for football and the pen was filled with male florists and dancers? Or, God forbid, an anti-terrorism campaign and the penned-up group were made up of Muslims, maybe waving the Quran and speaking Arabic?
We all know that none of those ads would make it past the network censors and onto the air and, if they did, the outcry, the protests, the boycotts and the ACLU lawsuits would start about three minutes after the ad first appeared. All involved in the creation and production of the ads would be ceremoniously fired and publicly crucified, and CNN would have hours of talking heads pointing out what is wrong with America.
The guilty company would be forced to pay huge amounts of money to the offended group as a way of showing their contrition and newfound understanding about how wrong it is to use stereotypes in any situation, but, worst of all, to generate a profit. So why is it OK to lampoon and stereotype white males?
Taking a step back, it is easy to blame all of the world's problems — global warming, global cooling, poverty, etc. — on the United States. Within the United States, it has become equally easy and acceptable to blame all of our problems on middle-aged, straight, white successful males.
This is because middle-aged, straight, white successful males are held responsible for everything that is wrong in America — starting with the destruction of the American Indian, straight into slavery, continuing with glass ceilings and Jim Crow laws and just about anything else that is wrong now or ever with our country.
The danger in allowing this to take place against one group, any group, is that you foster resentment within that group and, eventually, their actions will follow the accusations. It can also become fairly easy to identify and attack the next group in line.
Eliminating racism, prejudice, chauvinism and stereotypes from our society seems like a pretty good idea — one we have been working toward for quite a long time. Let's not exclude white males from this ideal, starting with Washington Mutual pulling its ads and developing a campaign that makes its point without pointing.
Apparently, those ads are not like by some. :rolleyes:
This would then have to qualify as a stereotype — a conventional, formulaic and oversimplified conception, opinion or image. The defense for this is that the ad is humorous. However, if every other use of a stereotype — even a gentle or humorous one — is labeled racist, chauvinistic or homophobic, shouldn't that same protection and consideration extend to white males?
http://www.trappedbanker.com/wamu.htm
Anti-white-male ad doesn't amuse (http://www.venturacountystar.com/vcs/opinion/article/0,1375,VCS_125_4831972,00.html)
By Scott Harris, scott@goldenagain.com | July 9, 2006
Washington Mutual is a $350 billion bank, based in Seattle, that does extensive business in California and is currently running a series of anti-white-male ads. The ads are known as the Banker's Pen. They show a group of middle-aged white males locked in a pen. All of them are wearing suits and ties, many are smoking cigars and most are balding and pudgy.
The counter to this is the casually dressed, hip, young black male who identifies the penned-up group as "traditional old-fashioned bankers" and goes on to say, "If they think it's wrong, we know it's right."
I don't think the depiction of "traditional old-fashioned bankers" as middle-aged white males is a coincidence, and I doubt there is a shortage of black, Latino or Asian actors, male and female, willing to play bankers in a television ad. I also doubt that in real life — even at WaMu — there is a shortage of blacks, Latinos, or Asians, male and female, who actually are bankers.
This would then have to qualify as a stereotype — a conventional, formulaic and oversimplified conception, opinion or image. The defense for this is that the ad is humorous. However, if every other use of a stereotype — even a gentle or humorous one — is labeled racist, chauvinistic or homophobic, shouldn't that same protection and consideration extend to white males?
Imagine other stereotypes and the reaction if they were used in an ad, no matter how accurate or inaccurate the stereotype, or how funny the ad. Picture an ad campaign with a penned-up group of executives breaking down and crying in stressful situations — and they were all women. The only one who could stand up to the stress — a white male?
How about an ad talking about the value of education and using a penned-up group of young black males, dressed in gang gear, as the counter to the studious Asian? What would the reaction be if the ad was for football and the pen was filled with male florists and dancers? Or, God forbid, an anti-terrorism campaign and the penned-up group were made up of Muslims, maybe waving the Quran and speaking Arabic?
We all know that none of those ads would make it past the network censors and onto the air and, if they did, the outcry, the protests, the boycotts and the ACLU lawsuits would start about three minutes after the ad first appeared. All involved in the creation and production of the ads would be ceremoniously fired and publicly crucified, and CNN would have hours of talking heads pointing out what is wrong with America.
The guilty company would be forced to pay huge amounts of money to the offended group as a way of showing their contrition and newfound understanding about how wrong it is to use stereotypes in any situation, but, worst of all, to generate a profit. So why is it OK to lampoon and stereotype white males?
Taking a step back, it is easy to blame all of the world's problems — global warming, global cooling, poverty, etc. — on the United States. Within the United States, it has become equally easy and acceptable to blame all of our problems on middle-aged, straight, white successful males.
This is because middle-aged, straight, white successful males are held responsible for everything that is wrong in America — starting with the destruction of the American Indian, straight into slavery, continuing with glass ceilings and Jim Crow laws and just about anything else that is wrong now or ever with our country.
The danger in allowing this to take place against one group, any group, is that you foster resentment within that group and, eventually, their actions will follow the accusations. It can also become fairly easy to identify and attack the next group in line.
Eliminating racism, prejudice, chauvinism and stereotypes from our society seems like a pretty good idea — one we have been working toward for quite a long time. Let's not exclude white males from this ideal, starting with Washington Mutual pulling its ads and developing a campaign that makes its point without pointing.